All I'm saying is the answer for offense is destroying the QB (it's actually the answer to solving all offenses) and teams are not going to pass up a shot at a QB in the mesh position. There's not going to be DEs and LBs looking completely stupid. They will either destroy a RB or a QB on every single ZR play instead of the college method of whiffing or debating or tripping over their own feet in confusion.

Yes, RBs like Shady and Lynch will have either huge games or concussions. Lynch had a big run on the play I linked. Think Carroll was okay with the hit Wilson took that bought it?

So teams will get tired of that and adjust or the Harbaughs of the league will have their way and that won't be permitted.

But we're headed down that path already with the hits you see them take and the whining from coaches that such hits evoke.

Oh and to your point, I'm not sure how Ds are going to adjust when thus far the running games are going nuts. And if teams start committing two to the run the pass games will open up. Again, this offense isn't complicated, it is a numbers game.

peeker643 wrote: But we're headed down that path already with the hits you see them take and the whining from coaches that such hits evoke.

Too bad Kaepernick or Wilson or RGIII don't play for Indy. Then instead of tweeting "OMG Shock and Awe We Just Overpaid for a RB!!!!" Irsay, like the incredible bag of douche he is, could get the rules changed to fit his QB as the Colts previously did with Manning.

But more to the point, why wouldn't the NFL change the rule so that you can't hit a QB when he doesn't have the ball?

I don't need to be patient, they're going to be shit forever. - CDT, discussing my favorite NFL team

e0y2e3 wrote:I don't understand how taking a shot running the read option is different than taking a shot in the pocket, especially since read option QBs take less shots in the pocket than say a Rogers.

Because you can legally hit them on running plays and they're still exposed (as you can see in the video) to huge hits that offer less protection to them than the passing rules do.

peeker643 wrote: But we're headed down that path already with the hits you see them take and the whining from coaches that such hits evoke.

Too bad Kaepernick or Wilson or RGIII don't play for Indy. Then instead of tweeting "OMG Shock and Awe We Just Overpaid for a RB!!!!" Irsay, like the incredible bag of douche he is, could get the rules changed to fit his QB as the Colts previously did with Manning.

But more to the point, why wouldn't the NFL change the rule so that you can't hit a QB when he doesn't have the ball?

It will have to if it wants the lifespan of guys like Wilson and RG3 to be longer than a fruit fly.

Guys like Kaep and Cam are gonna be fine, but they're gonna get hit too.

e0y2e3 wrote:Ah so getting hit while stationary and not expecting it in the pocket isn't career shortening and getting hit while expecting it on running plays is. Gotchya.

No. Stop being obtuse.

Handing the ball to a back rarely results in a QB being hit and hit while exposed.

Getting hit like Wilson did on the exchange w/Lynch on ZR means you're getting hit while defenseless and means you're potentially getting hit like that far more often. Or as often as you choose to run ZR.

There's also a difference between getting hit while standing still and a head-on crash with both two objects moving in the opposite directions. The poor QB could survive the former, but can end up like a bug on a windshield in a head-on.

jerryroche wrote:There's also a difference between getting hit while standing still and a head-on crash with both two objects moving in the opposite directions. The poor QB could survive the former, but can end up like a bug on a windshield in a head-on.

This is beyond stupid.

Seriously? It is better to "take" a blindside hit than it is to take a shot you know is coming?

peeker643 wrote:Bottom line is that if you don't think Ahmad Brooks (and pretty much all defenders across the league, now) aren't being coached to do what he did to Wilson I think you're being naive.

If you don't think it will have an effect that's a different conversation but, well, res ipsa locquitor on the video provided.

And I also don't believe that the 'defenseless player' rule applies within the tackle box and to 'potential' ball carriers. Wilson is fair game there and Brooks' hit was legal.

For now...

Seriously, what in the fuck does this matter? I'm not being obtuse. There is literally no difference in a DE being coached to hit a quarterback the 10 or so times a game he runs the read option than there is if he dropped back those 10 times. And if defense want to keep doing that they will pay the price in terms of wins.

Honestly of fucking gawd, Aaron Rogers was hit as much as any running QB last year but those hits don't count because they weren't after a hand off? These "passing" offenses the do nothing but drop back cause DEs to be coached to completely ignore the run and go kill the QB.... but that doesn't matter here because inside the tackle box they can't hit the QBs head?

Also, if run correctly the spread slows down the pass rush because DEs have run responsibilities and they run the offense off of those run sets.

Last edited by e0y2e3 on Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Good teams are already dealing with the read-option. As always, better be far more thrower than a runner. Just that the days of being a statue in pocket are over (for now).

They're going to keep hitting QBs and for now the QBs have no protection from those hits. That's how defenses are dealing with it. That's how they're going to continue to deal with it and they'll sacrifice that "responsibility" you speak of to lay out those guys.

peeker643 wrote:Bottom line is that if you don't think Ahmad Brooks (and pretty much all defenders across the league, now) aren't being coached to do what he did to Wilson I think you're being naive.

If you don't think it will have an effect that's a different conversation but, well, res ipsa locquitor on the video provided.

And I also don't believe that the 'defenseless player' rule applies within the tackle box and to 'potential' ball carriers. Wilson is fair game there and Brooks' hit was legal.

For now...

Seriously, what in the fuck does this matter? I'm not being obtuse. There is literally no difference in a DE being coached to hit a quarterback the 10 or so times a game he runs the read option than there is if he dropped back those 10 times. And if defense want to keep doing that they will pay the price in terms of wins.

Honestly of fucking gawd, Aaron Rogers was hit as much as any running QB last year but those hits don't count because they weren't after a hand off? These "passing" offenses the do nothing but drop back cause DEs to be coached to completely ignore the run and go kill the QB.... but that doesn't matter here because inside the tackle box they can't hit the QBs head?

Also, if run correctly the spread slows down the pass rush because DEs have run responsibilities and they run the offense off of those run sets.

SD:

Fuck but are you just naturally ignorant or is this something you work on .

Outside the pocket they're fair game , which means they can ge tagged whether they have the ball or not .

Moreover , DB , can get a running start from the secondary , and slice one of them suckas in half after before or during a pitch , Ooops my bad , I didn't see he pitched the damn thing

In the pocket they get hit and dragged down and sacked , which ain't good , but it is no way near the head on collision, brute force energy produced when two moving objects tryin to occupy the same space coming in different directions meet head on you stoopid fuck.

jerryroche wrote:There's also a difference between getting hit while standing still and a head-on crash with both two objects moving in the opposite directions. The poor QB could survive the former, but can end up like a bug on a windshield in a head-on.

This is beyond stupid.

Seriously? It is better to "take" a blindside hit than it is to take a shot you know is coming?

Tell that to Sir Isaac Newton. It's high school physics. Newton's Second Law.

His point, I believe, is that you can "prepare" yourself for the hit you see coming. In whatever way, whether leaning, leading with your should, twisting yourself etc. When you get hit blindside you get hit BLINDside and you usually don't know you're getting hit or know how the defender is leading?

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:His point, I believe, is that you can "prepare" yourself for the hit you see coming. In whatever way, whether leaning, leading with your should, twisting yourself etc. When you get hit blindside you get hit BLINDside and you usually don't know you're getting hit or know how the defender is leading?

The fact he needs you to explain his point does nothing for his point.

Which was never the point.

Double your driving on crowded streets and you're more likely to get in a fucking accident. It's that simple. Could you get in one on a country road that kills you? Yes. But if you put yourself (or someone else puts you) in a situation where the potential for contact is greater you're more likely to get hit.

Which doesn't eliminate or lessen the chance you get hit on the country road either.

Again, risk management basics. It's not that fucking hard unless you're dim or unless you just have no one else to argue with other than people here.

With the game essentially over and the Raiders down 37-14, Terrelle Pryor departed the field for the locker room to be evaluated. Pryor suffered a big hit on a designed quarterback run with the Raiders knocking on the Broncos goal line.

At the time he took a massive shot but remained in the game and attempted a pair of passes -- both incomplete -- before the Broncos turned the ball over on downs.

Means nothing. Coulda gotten killed eating a an egg/cheese and bacon biscuit sandwich or dropping back to pass on that very play.

Oh I agree with you on that, I've said it since JB initiated this convo two weeks ago. The opportunity for these QBs to get hit will increase and will take its toll at some point. But to be honest it has not been and extreme amount of carries yet. Take Kaepernick, took the world by storm the last half of 2012, with his feet and arm. Only once did he actually carry the ball more than 9 times.

But to the above point blindside v. head on, yeah it does matter, b/c if you can't see it you can't prepare for it.

TP concussion : the hit :: Dale Eearnhart dying : the crash

Guys get hit like that all day long in this league, wasn't extremely hard and it was legal.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:Guys get hit like that all day long in this league, wasn't extremely hard and it was legal.

Again, guys like TP are simply going to be exposed more often.

This concept isn't arguable or difficult to understand. And that's how defenses are going to handle it until they can't. Time will tell what type of impact that will have on the offense they run. My thoughts are at some point there are diminishing returns on exposing those QBs to those hits.

Or there are ultimately a diminishing number of those QBs.

The blind side hits will happen. I guess you can somewhat mitigate that with excellent OL play, 3 and 5 step drops with the ball getting out quicker, etc. But you can't mitigate the exposure to a QB on the ZR unless the league mandates it with rules changes.

BTW, I'm fine with that. I don't care one way or the other. But saying it isn't how defenses are going to appproach it until they can't doesn't make sense to me. Coaches like Harbaugh already see it and are lobbying to protect them. That should also be pretty telling, IMO.

You mean risk management like how the 49ers took the "risk" to hit Russel Wilson a whole THREE extra times when he didn't have the ball to try and get them to stop read optioning them to death and then went back to playing defense because they were getting their asses kicked?

Or Risk Management in that Aaron Rogers took as many hits as Kaep or Wilson last year?

Or Risk Management in that when you see something coming at you avoiding taking a direct shot is perfectly simple and easy, but when you don't the nape of your back is fair game? The head and the neck are the most susceptible body parts to injury and when you see a shot coming it is in fact far easier to, you know, protect those body parts?

Or maybe we should get into the fact that all of these "drag down" sacks SD talks about have led to far more concussions for inside the pocket passers than running QBs?

For fucks sake you all are morons. Seriously. Hoodoo had it right over a page ago.

I'm done with this because numbers, facts, etc don't matter. Nope. Russell Wilson got hit hard THREE extra times in a game where his team read optioned the opponent all the way off the field.

Of course we also aren't going to address the fact that the read option and it's various packages also slows down pass rushes, whereas the Rogers spread invites teams to just pin their ears back and try to kill him. But that doesn't matter because Russell Wilson got hit THREE extra times and theirs a GIF of one of them!!!

You mean risk management like how the 49ers took the "risk" to hit Russel Wilson a whole THREE extra times when he didn't have the ball to try and get them to stop read optioning them to death and then went back to playing defense because they were getting their asses kicked?

It was 0-0 in the 2nd quarter at the time. 5-0 ass kicking at half.12-0 pasting after three quarters.

Or Risk Management in that Aaron Rogers took as many hits as Kaep or Wilson last year?

Given Rodgers played 16 games and Kaep didn't and Rodgers had twice as many attempts, are you sure you want to build your shitty argument on the fact that were both hit the same number of times?

Or Risk Management in that when you see something coming at you avoiding taking a direct shot is perfectly simple and easy, but when you don't the nape of your back is fair game? The head and the neck are the most susceptible body parts to injury and when you see a shot coming it is in fact far easier to, you know, protect those body parts?

Like Wilson did in the gif and Pryor did last night? Or you talking about the blindside hit 37-yr old Manning took in the 3rd quarter? No hits are healthy, dipshit.

Or maybe we should get into the fact that all of these "drag down" sacks SD talks about have led to far more concussions for inside the pocket passers than running QBs?

There are far more years of data, far more pocket passers. You're drawing on a year or two of ZR QBs. Talk to me when then the sample isn't skewed.

For fucks sake you all are morons. Seriously. Hoodoo had it right over a page ago.

You should start a site for you and HooDoo where you could speak in code and that would entice all the brightest sports minds in the webosphere to show up and be amusing.

I'm done with this because numbers, facts, etc don't matter. Nope. Russell Wilson got hit hard THREE extra times in a game where his team read optioned the opponent all the way off the field.

I know how you feel. You don't want to state that exposing the QB on ZR actually increases their exposure to hits. You just prefer to be an asshole, take what you want from a sentence or statement that doesn't say what you turn it into, and then rant away like a tourretes patient.

Of course we also aren't going to address the fact that the read option and it's various packages also slows down pass rushes, whereas the Rogers spread invites teams to just pin their ears back and try to kill him. But that doesn't matter because Russell Wilson got hit THREE extra times and theirs a GIF of one of them!!!

I'm not and haven't said it's not a valid, valuable, more productive offense at this point if you have the talented QB to run it. Not one fucking time. I said the exposure the QBs who run it have to additional hits is a factor and that's currently the method that NFL defenses have implemented to defend it. Now, if you wanna unclench your anus and and count to ten that's all well and good. Try and use your adult voice instead of your insolent child method of debate.

You mean risk management like how the 49ers took the "risk" to hit Russel Wilson a whole THREE extra times when he didn't have the ball to try and get them to stop read optioning them to death and then went back to playing defense because they were getting their asses kicked?

It was 0-0 in the 2nd quarter at the time. 5-0 ass kicking at half.12-0 pasting after three quarters.

Or Risk Management in that Aaron Rogers took as many hits as Kaep or Wilson last year?

Given Rodgers played 16 games and Kaep didn't and Rodgers had twice as many attempts, are you sure you want to build your shitty argument on the fact that were both hit the same number of times?

Or Risk Management in that when you see something coming at you avoiding taking a direct shot is perfectly simple and easy, but when you don't the nape of your back is fair game? The head and the neck are the most susceptible body parts to injury and when you see a shot coming it is in fact far easier to, you know, protect those body parts?

Like Wilson did in the gif and Pryor did last night? Or you talking about the blindside hit 37-yr old Manning took in the 3rd quarter? No hits are healthy, dipshit.

Or maybe we should get into the fact that all of these "drag down" sacks SD talks about have led to far more concussions for inside the pocket passers than running QBs?

There are far more years of data, far more pocket passers. You're drawing on a year or two of ZR QBs. Talk to me when then the sample isn't skewed.

For fucks sake you all are morons. Seriously. Hoodoo had it right over a page ago.

You should start a site for you and HooDoo where you could speak in code and that would entice all the brightest sports minds in the webosphere to show up and be amusing.

I'm done with this because numbers, facts, etc don't matter. Nope. Russell Wilson got hit hard THREE extra times in a game where his team read optioned the opponent all the way off the field.

I know how you feel. You don't want to state that exposing the QB on ZR actually increases their exposure to hits. You just prefer to be an asshole, take what you want from a sentence or statement that doesn't say what you turn it into, and then rant away like a tourretes patient.

Of course we also aren't going to address the fact that the read option and it's various packages also slows down pass rushes, whereas the Rogers spread invites teams to just pin their ears back and try to kill him. But that doesn't matter because Russell Wilson got hit THREE extra times and theirs a GIF of one of them!!!

I'm not and haven't said it's not a valid, valuable, more productive offense at this point if you have the talented QB to run it. Not one fucking time. I said the exposure the QBs who run it have to additional hits is a factor and that's currently the method that NFL defenses have implemented to defend it. Now, if you wanna unclench your anus and and count to ten that's all well and good. Try and use your adult voice instead of your insolent child method of debate.

I don't why can't or won't differentiate or acknowledge that I'm not debating the effectiveness, usefulnness or explosiveness of the offense.

I'm saying there's a price for it and that's increased exposure to QB getting hit far more often.

He gives the ball to Lynch on a draw, on a trap, on a dive, on a counter he doesn't get touched. In fact, you can't hit him. Very rarely will he get blindsided while dropping back. Very rarely (per attempt) will he get sacked at all, often times he'll never get touched. The only way he ain't getting hit on ZR is probably if he takes it to the end zone.

Clay Matthews on Kaep, Brooks on Wilson, the entire Bronco defensive front seven against Pryor, defenses are going to take every single legal opportunity (and in the case of Matthews the illegal ones too) to hit the QB. That concept is in no way new. But the volume of opportunities goes way up with ZR QBs.

That's all. No need to take it as an affront to your intelligence. I just think it's going to result in some of those guys getting beaten down and, as likely, additional rules put in place to protect them somehow.

Not sure how far they can take that. I do not want to see 60 minutes of mobile QBs running 5 yards and sliding feet first.

Cheers back at ya.

e0y2e3 wrote:By the fourth quarter of the 49ers game Wilson walked for a huge gain on a ZR he kept because the DEs had backed off so much, so yeah, they took a shot early and stopped because it wasn't working.

Outside of that whatever, somehow exposure is increased because he is standing three feet outside of the tackle box instead of standing straight behind center. One hit counts, the other doesn't.

e0y2e3 wrote:By the fourth quarter of the 49ers game Wilson walked for a huge gain on a ZR he kept because the DEs had backed off so much, so yeah, they took a shot early and stopped because it wasn't working.

Outside of that whatever, somehow exposure is increased because he is standing three feet outside of the tackle box instead of standing straight behind center. One hit counts, the other doesn't.

Cheers.

By the 4th quarter of a game in which the defense has been on the field all day, any ol' offensive system will be ripping off huge chunks.

Clearly, the 'Hawks would've put that game to bed long ago had they employed a non-bullshit/gimmick system.

Just defenses catching up to specific players, absence of weaponry, not recovering from injury, coaching, philosophy, what?

Possibly expected evolutionary process, or HCs talking a step back. I'm not interested in rekindling that debate from above, but I agreed with A LOT of what e0y2e3 said on this. I don't think any of this is dead, and to be honest and objective none of the hot shot rookies from last year have looked as good as they did last year for this entire season (only exception to argue would be Luck), read option or no read option. Also the ZR/RO has not been used as much either, IMO intentionally. But it wasn't used nearly as mush last season as many people think anyway.

IMO the need for athleticism for ANY QB especially pro style/drop back has reached a level of absolute. So I think the ZR/RO/QBs from Gimmicky offenses with uber athletics will still get their shots and be in high demand.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

Athleticism has become a pre-req at that position with the revolution of the game. Being able to read and react at a higher level has also become imperative. In 1983, a big, somewhat immobile player, who was a very gifted thrower and wasn't looking at constantly changing defensive looks, had a pretty good shot.

In 2013 you're Brandon Weeden.

That being said, still, by far, trumping the above is the ability to throw the ball. Again, as I mentioned before, a guy like Aaron Rodgers is the prototype. Excellent athlete, but what he does best is throw the ball.

Terell Pryor is gonna get you the same things as Vince Young in this league - unless he learns to pass better. Period.

Reason for the order? I've seen guys who had only the top two, but were extremely good in those regards have sustained success in modern football. We saw 2 Sunday Night. I have not seen a guy that had Athleticism ahead of one of the other two areas that had sustained success.

If you don't throw the ball well, or understand what's going on, injuries are the least of your problems for an athletic QB.

Lastly, the emergence of my number 2 above is reeking havoc with pro QB analysis. Guys like Brandon Weeden, Geno Smith....they had to do basically zero of this. Now they do - and it smacked them right in the mouth. Guys like Bridgewater - Christ, against Louisville's defensive opponents? Guy looks good, but I'll be damned if anyone knows what level thinker the guy is. Doesn't have to do it. You saw a guy like Hundley have a couple red flags against Stanford - He was primary option heavy - and when it wasn't there he took off too quickly. But we're not seeing these guys tested like a Stanford tests you more than once a year. Anyone confident in the great athlete Mariotta? - cause guys were a few weeks ago.

Hikohadon wrote:The revolution has been cancelled due to lack of effectiveness.

You are one revolution behind.

I'm not speaking of the Chip Kelly/Read option/Pistol revolution.

I'm speaking of the change in philosophies (dicatated by rule changes) in which the way you move the ball BY FAR most effectively is the pass. The one where good teams set up the run with the pass, not the age old vice versa (unless you're Pat Shurmer) - the one which the only real way to defend is rush the passer. This is the revolution I'm speaking of above.

Hikohadon wrote:The revolution has been cancelled due to lack of effectiveness.

You are one revolution behind.

I'm not speaking of the Chip Kelly/Read option/Pistol revolution.

I'm speaking of the change in philosophies (dicatated by rule changes) in which the way you move the ball BY FAR most effectively is the pass. The one where good teams set up the run with the pass, not the age old vice versa (unless you're Pat Shurmer) - the one which the only real way to defend is rush the passer. This is the revolution I'm speaking of above.

That revolution is like a decade old. Really, one could argue it started in the 60's. Pretty sure that's what the Beatles were singing about.

Last edited by Hikohadon on Wed Nov 27, 2013 10:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Hikohadon wrote:The revolution has been cancelled due to lack of effectiveness.

You are one revolution behind.

I'm not speaking of the Chip Kelly/Read option/Pistol revolution.

I'm speaking of the change in philosophies (dicatated by rule changes) in which the way you move the ball BY FAR most effectively is the pass. The one where good teams set up the run with the pass, not the age old vice versa (unless you're Pat Shurmer) - the one which the only real way to defend is rush the passer. This is the revolution I'm speaking of above.

That revolution is like a decade old. Really, one could argue it started in the 60's. Pretty sure that's what the Beatles were singing about.

Well, there's still professional football coaches out there that have yet to figure it out.